Saturday, May 30, 2015

Courts Strike Abortion Bans, Supreme Court Next

Even as medical science proves fetal viability ever earlier in gestation, federal appeals courts continue to strike down state laws protecting unborn viable human beings from abortionists. Now, with Congress passing a ban on abortions after 20 weeks gestation, the Supreme Court will soon have no choice but to consider when life begins.

“It is high time for this court to revisit the issue” of abortion, Mississippi Atty. Gen. Jim Hood told the Supreme Court justices in a brief filed in early May.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said Idaho's law violates Supreme Court precedent protecting abortions up to the point of viability for a fetus, which has been considered to be around 24 weeks.

Courts have struck down such bans before. In 2013, the 9th Circuit also ruled an Arizona ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to that decision.

Ten states currently have 20-week abortion bans, according to the pro-abortion rights Guttmacher Institute. [Those states being Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, North Dakota, Texas and West Virginia].

There has been rising support for 20-week bans among Republicans. . . .

Idaho's Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is "facially unconstitutional," a 9th Circuit panel said in a 28-page ruling, because "it categorically bans some abortions before viability" and "places an undue burden on a woman's ability to obtain an abortion by requiring hospitalizations for all second-trimester abortions."

The panel found that Jennie McCormack and her attorney-physician Richard Hearn still faced the "lingering risk" of prosecution under a law which banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Therefore they could challenge the constitutionality of the law, the panel said.

In March 2013, Chief U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill found that the regulations are unconstitutional.

A federal appeals court struck down one of the nation’s toughest abortion restrictions [Act 301 of 2013, the Arkansas Human Heartbeat Protection Act] on Wednesday, agreeing with a lower court that a state law unconstitutionally burdens women by banning abortions after the 12th week of pregnancy if a doctor can detect a fetal heartbeat.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit sided with doctors who challenged the law, ruling that abortion restrictions must be based on a fetus’s ability to live outside the womb, not the presence of a fetal heartbeat, which can be detected weeks earlier.

In 2014, an Arkansas federal judge sided with Supreme Court precedent and struck down the law.

Arkansas appealed to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that the viability standard cannot be the end of the discussion when weighed against the state's interest in protecting human life.

The court did acknowledge that medical advances since Roe v. Wade - the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision holding that privacy and due-process rights extend to a woman's decision to have an abortion - have moved fetus viability closer to conception, but found that "viability determination necessarily calls for a case-by-case determination and changes over time based on medical advancements" and that legislatures are better suited to make judgments in this area.

The Center for Reproductive Rights and the Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit challenging Act 301 on behalf of two Little Rock doctors who perform abortions [Dr. Louis Jerry Edwards and Dr. Tom Tvedten].

Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway, who sponsored the legislation that became Act 301, said he was disappointed with the ruling but happy that “every single woman who goes to a clinic is going to have to have an ultrasound. She will have to be informed if there is the presence of a heartbeat in the womb.”

For years, the [Supreme Court] justices have steered clear of most abortion cases. A decision to turn down the latest appeals, from Mississippi and North Carolina, would be a victory for abortion rights advocates. . . .

At the Supreme Court, justices could announce as soon as Monday whether they will hear the Mississippi case. A decision on whether to hear North Carolina's appeal should come by mid-June.

Attorneys for the states that have passed new restrictions say the court should clarify the law governing abortions. In 1992, in its last sweeping abortion ruling, the high court said states may regulate the procedures so long as their rules do not put an “undue burden” on women seeking to end a pregnancy.

Lawyers for Mississippi called that a “vague and amorphous standard” which has not provided “meaningful guidance” to lawmakers or judges.

The percentage of Americans who say they would only vote for a candidate who shares their views on abortion has been edging up over the past seven years. The 21% who currently say this is, by one percentage point, the highest Gallup has found in its 19-year history of asking the question. The percentage of Americans who do not see abortion as a major issue in their voting decision has declined over the same period, and is now at 27%. Most of the rest (46%) say that abortion is one of many important factors they will take into account.

The recent uptick in the importance Americans place on where candidates stand on abortion comes as many states have enacted new or increased abortion restrictions. State lawmakers have passed more than 200 regulations on abortion since 2010, after Republicans gained control of many state legislatures. Republicans in Congress are currently advocating a federal bill banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, although President Barack Obama is unlikely to sign it.